On 01/10/2018 02:13 PM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 7:29 PM, Jeff Law <l...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 01/09/2018 07:43 AM, Martin Liška wrote: >>> On 09/20/2017 05:00 PM, Jeff Law wrote: >>>> On 09/20/2017 01:24 AM, Martin Liška wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hello. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you Jeff for very verbose explanation what's happening. I'm >>>>> planning to do >>>>> follow-up of this patch that will include clustering for bit-tests and >>>>> jump tables. >>>>> Maybe that will make aforementioned issues even more difficult, but we'll >>>>> see. >>>> FWIW, the DOM changes to simplify the conditionals seem to help both >>>> cases, trigger reasonably consistently in a bootstrap and for some >>>> subset of the triggers actually result in transformations that allow >>>> other passes to do a better job in the common (-O2) case. So my >>>> inclination is to polish them a bit further get them on the trunk. >>>> >>>> My recommendation is to ignore the two regressions for now and focus on >>>> the cleanups you're trying to do. >>>> >>>> jeff >>>> >>> >>> Hello. >>> >>> Some time ago I've decided that I'll make patch submission of switch >>> clustering >>> in next stage1. However, this patch can be applied as is in this stage3. >>> Would >>> it be possible or is it too late? >> I'll let Richi make the call here. FWIW, the DOM changes to avoid the >> two missed-optimization regressions you ran into are on the trunk, so >> that's no longer a blocking issue. > > If you are fine with waiting then please wait ;)
Yep, it's not urgent. Thanks. Martin > > Richard. > >> jeff
